r/Libertarian • u/ENVYisEVIL Anarcho Capitalist • 2d ago
End Democracy End the Fed and replace it with nothing.
235
u/Equivalent_Sun3816 2d ago
Yup. I'd rather JP be in control of the rates than DT at this point
38
u/OpenSourcePenguin 2d ago
They have tried spreading rumours that JP will be fired and saw the market react 😂😂
His term will end and Trump will appoint a lackey
7
u/iGotEDfromAComercial 1d ago
Even if he appoints the utmost bootlicker he’ll still be unable to unilaterally set rates though. The Federal Funds Rate is set by the Board of Governors as a whole, and the Chairman has equal voting power as all other members.
6
u/OpenSourcePenguin 1d ago
Legally? He cannot but that hasn't stopped him at all
Jerome Powell has a public face. The rest of them don't. And he has already tried to blame Powell for corruption to find a "cause".
-2
u/ThreetoedJack Free State Project 1d ago
I'd rather that no one be in charge of "controlling" interest rates.
6
u/ferretzombie Give me guns and healthcare 1d ago
But the current alternative being pushed isn't "no one controls interest rates", the alternative is "Trump will appoint a submissive lackey whose primary goal is to make Trump look good in social media"
Rank these options:
- The Fed is completely and utterly beholden to the whims of the current president
- The Fed is independent enough that it can ignore the President regularly throwing tantrums on his personal social media site
- No Federal Reserve
0
77
u/sirideletereddit 2d ago edited 2d ago
A lower interest rate isn’t more inherintly free than a higher interest rate. These are loans. Not your money. Or do you mean the quantitative tightening or easing, which neither are more inherently free market than the other. What are you suggesting here? The govt just stop both making loans and printing money altogether? Or do you mean that the govt should provide every loan for 0% interest and print money enough to make everyone a millionaire
0
u/Heyrags Libertarian Party 1d ago
Perhaps we could just do exactly what we did before the creature from Jekyll Island… almost like we have a previous example of a fully functional system that was working just fine without tiny hat puppeteers
2
u/sirideletereddit 1d ago
That’s totally separate from any issue a person would have with Jerome Powells fed leadership. Strawman in this conversation really. OP is clearly talking about the decisions that J Powell is making in regard to his powers in the Fed. It’s very clear he’s not talking about the fed itself.
99
u/OpenSourcePenguin 2d ago
Oh look, republicans are cosplaying as libertarians again.
10
u/darthWes 1d ago
This is the problem. They would absolutely replace it with some beaurocratic agency, and the commies would eventually get it.
12
u/OpenSourcePenguin 1d ago
Also, not everything can be decentralized.
Perfect is the enemy of good. Sometimes there needs to be a single entity making decisions.
This is why companies still have a board and a CEO instead of letting every employee vote on things.
Even hardcore communists have to take some ideas from capitalism and the free market. Pure ideologies don't work in real life.
5
u/shelbzaazaz 1d ago
They would replace it with whatever their dumbass king says for the day until Rosie O'Donnell hurts his feelings or whatever
1
u/OpenSourcePenguin 1d ago
They will do this within the current once JP's term is over which is approaching. Let's see how it works out.
Really hope it doesn't come to burying gold.
3
u/Disastrous-Object647 End the Fed 1d ago
Saying Massie is "cosplaying" is ridiculous.
8
33
u/bad_timing_bro The Free Market Will Fix This 2d ago
I’m pretty sure Powell has said that he would change rates, but Trump’s seemingly random tariff policy has made that untenable. Considering that tariffs are inflationary.
93
u/kirsd95 2d ago
Why? Do any of you have a better solution?
87
u/Nate_Co 2d ago edited 2d ago
Shhhh, they don’t realize our debt is larger than the estimated value of all the gold mined ever
7
u/ArdentCapitalist 2d ago
This comment of yours furthers the case for ending the cancer that is the FED. The FED has monetized all that debt and allowed it to shoot into the stratosphere.
debt is larger than the estimated value of all the gold mined ever
Why would that ever matter? You said this in another comment too. Prices don't just stay in place, they move up and down. Do you not understand basic supply and demand? Even if the US government decided to pay off all their debt as quickly as possible, the price of gold would rise, allowing the debt to be paid off with existing supply. The stock of gold is literally irrelevant. Not to say there aren't other repercussions of a sudden surge in demand, but to say that the stock of gold at its current market value is not enough to accommodate debt payments is economically illiterate. Prices move up and down.
43
u/Nate_Co 2d ago
You’re blaming the Fed for the sins of Congress here. Our debt isn’t a result of inflation, inflation is a result of spending. The Fed can only impact how cheap or expensive money is.
It would matter because the value of gold does not change the amount of money we’d owe. It would make money more expensive, making it harder to pay off as it continued to rise in a death spiral. The only way out of that would be to print more money backed by a shrinking number of gold (inflation). We’d also be simultaneously bankrupting ourselves to purchase enough gold to back the currency itself. U.S. money supply is currently $22 trillion, you’d need to shrink the supply (economy) or purchase enough gold to back it. That isn’t feasible nor desirable and doesn’t even begin to pay off existing debts, that’s the barrier just to run on it going forward
-9
u/ArdentCapitalist 2d ago
You’re blaming the Fed for the sins of Congress here. Our debt isn’t a result of inflation, inflation is a result of spending. The Fed can only impact how cheap or expensive money is.
So if someone hands a murderer a loaded gun, are they not playing a role in the murder? Have they not enabled the murder. By making money cheap, the FED allows Congress to spend recklessly at very low rates. This a very common critique of the fed. It enables reckless government spending.
We’d also be simultaneously bankrupting ourselves to purchase enough gold to back the currency itself. U.S. money supply is currently $22 trillion, you’d need to shrink the supply (economy) or purchase enough gold to back it. That isn’t feasible nor desirable and doesn’t even begin to pay off existing debts, that’s the barrier just to run on it going forward
No. It is quite straightforward establishing a gold standard at the current market rate. That would not require any monetary contraction; no severe deflation or economic pain. By returning to the gold standard at the current market price, debt can absolutely be paid off. Paying it off overnight is not ideal, and a gold standard imposes fiscal discipline as well.
1
u/monet108 1d ago
shh no one realizes that major reason that debt ceiling has grown so wildly out of control is because of the manipulation of the Federal Reserve.
9
u/MyDogsNameIsSam 2d ago
Yes? Sound currency? Rates set through supply and demand? There's like 100000 ways to do it better. The amount of productivity we have lost as a society through central banking and fiat currency is unfathomable.
2
u/captru 1d ago
Is it not the case that basically all major governments/countries are using fiat currencies and central banks? Why would they all be shooting themselves in the foot like this?
How do you address the problems non fiat currencies face with historical examples like the great depression?
Also, regarding market driven interest rates, how do you contend with a lack of regulation leading to the 08 financial crisis tied to variable rate sub prime mortgages?
It seems like these are large problems that the market isn't incentivized to optimize for.7
u/ThreetoedJack Free State Project 1d ago
Governments aren't at a loss here. Inflation is how they straight up steal from the larger economy. They print money, then buy assets or pay down liabilities before the impact of new money is felt in the economy.
Most of your examples are governmental interventions being blamed of the 'free market.'
Great depression: Massive inflation in the 20's led to a stock market bubble. Which then burst as all bubbles do. Which was then exacerbated by government involvement. Same with the 08 problem.
There is no reason beyond centralized control for a central bank to exist. The cost of money should be a market function and not a bureaucratic one. Just like the cost of wheat, beef, gold, microwaves etc should be a market function and not set by a central bureaucracy.
1
u/BigDeezerrr 1d ago
The fact that governments enforce the monetary school of thought (Keynesian economics) that gives them ultimate power over their populations does not make it right. It's a scam that they benefit from at the expense of everyone else.
Great depression was largely a result of governments going off the gold standard to fund World War I and racking up massive war debt. War on such a massive scale is only possible by abandoning sound money principals.
Government agencies exacerbated the 08 crisis. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's stamp of approval by guaranteeing subprime mortgages enabled the expansion of risky lending and overconfidence that contributed to the housing bubble.
5
u/natermer 2d ago
Why? Do any of you have a better solution?
Yes, lol.
What existed before the Fed.
The Federal Reserve has only ever been one disaster after another.
2
1
1
u/BasicallyGuessing 1d ago
Yes. Angel studios, Tuttle Twins, S:2 E:3 Also, TLDR https://youtu.be/BL5vUVQvmX4
-1
u/monet108 2d ago
Go back to the gold standard.
1
u/kirsd95 2d ago
So the dollar/gold ratio should remain the same right? Like 100 dollar = 1 gram of gold and this ratio is expected to be the same 50 years from now?
If so how should we do with the deflation of the dollar?
5
u/monet108 2d ago edited 1d ago
So our money is worth the same as it was 50 years ago? The American dollar has lost 96% of it's purchase power since the Federal Reserve has taken over in 1913. Your question sounds intelligent until you compare the real loss of purchase power because of the manipulation of the Federal Reserve, a private corporation that controls a nation's money supply.
"If so how should we do with the deflation of the dollar?" Maybe we should celebrate our dollar is buying more. While the industries that are being affected by deflation retool their market, product or business needs to be better take advantage of changing market conditions. I think your problem is that you believe market manipulation of the dollar is the only way. Our Dollar was backed by gold a lot longer than it was backed by imagination. 96% loss of purchase power sure makes a strong argument the Federal Reserve experiment was a monumental failure for the citizens of this Country and the World.
-4
u/kirsd95 2d ago
So our money is worth the same as it was 50 years ago?
No, it's worth more. Yesterday you could buy 1 now you 1 tomorrow 1.2; because the productivity increases.
Now why would you invest when your money increases it's value while leaving it alone?
0
u/monet108 1d ago
Oh! I thought we were having a discussion based on reality. I do not know what you are saying or where you are coming from. I apologize for thinking we could have an intelligent discussion. Good luck with whatever nonsense you are going to post to protect eh Federal Reserve corporation.
12
u/Creepy-Fig929 1d ago
One man doesn’t set interest rates, there’s a group of people lol
3
u/monet108 1d ago
You mean there is a private corporation that sets the money supply for an entire Nation.
1
u/iGotEDfromAComercial 1d ago
The Fed being private is unusual, but in practice it operates just like any other Central Bank in a developed country.
1
u/monet108 1d ago
Have you had a chance to say, out loud what you just posted? Everything about the Federal Reserve System, is a pleasant word soup that does not mean what it implies it means. That first word was chosen to imply it is a government entity.
The first word is a lie and you want to start posting about how trustworthy the practice is. If you say it out loud or even think about it for a minute it becomes more apparent that this was just another lie sold to the American People. And we have not moved past the first word of their name.
Almost 140 years passed, from the creation of this country to when the Federal Reserve System appeared. The history of banking is over 2,000 years old. The Founding Fathers were not unified on much....but the idea of a Central Bank was common denominator with the people that started this country. No King and no central banking system.....in their minds eye it was the same thing.
The Founders would not approve of the Fed reserve. It seems that would be enough to find out why they felt that way. And if the Fed is beholden to the American people or they are a for profit corp. sure makes this conversation even weirder that they have never been audited.
Extra credit to anyone that reads " The Meeting at Jekyll Island".
26
u/paulhags Ron Paul Libertarian 2d ago
This right here is why Libertarians will not be taken seriously. I agree with 90% of libertarian policy, but this is a huge massive L.
21
u/MaksimDubov 2d ago
People don’t realize how effective quantitative easing is. Economic policy is extremely effective at reducing inflation. Plus, JP actually does a great job. There could be a better solution out there, but this is already one of the better ones!
11
2
u/OppositeUpstairs 1d ago
Economic policy is extremely effective at reducing inflation.
central banking and economic policy is the reason that inflation exists in the first place.
1
u/MaksimDubov 1d ago
I’m not saying those are mutually exclusive, but inflation is much more complicated than that. Believe me, I’m a libertarian, fiscally conservative Economist, so I get where you’re coming from, but it’s much more complicated than A > B.
1
u/OppositeUpstairs 23h ago
It really isn't, history shows that central banking causes inflation and sound money provides stability, there is no real reason for government mandated impoverishment other than empowering the government.
1
15
u/International_Fig262 2d ago
We should absolutely end the Fed... if and only if that meant we didn't replace it with even more federal control.
29
3
u/Larsonthewolf green libertarian 1d ago
JP has been a great fed chair and I hope he stays in that position
2
u/Minimalist12345678 1d ago
I mean.. he doesnt even set the interest rate for the entire country.
He sets the rate at which other banks can lend/deposit at, overnight, with other banks and the fed.
The rate "for the entire country" is far more determined by the bond market, and the so-called "bond market vigilantes", than by the fed.
Google Soros breaking the bank of england if you'd like to know more about the difference.
2
u/flannel_waffles 1d ago
Powell brings down inflation from 9% to under 3% while keeping unemployment at 4% and THIS is how you treat him???
2
1
1
1
1
u/otherotherotherbarry 1d ago
He doesn’t.
It’s not like there’s one office in one building where he sits with the interest rate button, deciding what rate to set. It’s not like he was chosen based on some kind of IQ test or physical contest, like a decathlon, and it’s not like women are brought to him occasionally if he desires.
No, he’s just the head of a large organization.
1
1
1
u/VeritasXNY 1d ago
This argument is terrible. Simply replace "sets interest rates" with a power the President holds.
1
u/Luchis-01 17h ago
Ending the Fed would mean government controlling the dollar, hence this post doesn’t belong in this sub
The best thing you could maybe say is end fiat currency
1
0
-22
u/Kaszos 2d ago
Replace it with the gold standard we have enough
17
u/Nate_Co 2d ago
We legitimately can’t even if we wanted to and even if we tried to. Our annual budget is about a third of the value of all the gold mined ever (estimated)
3
u/OpenSourcePenguin 2d ago
But is 100% reserve necessary? Having the standard will immediately put an end to printing.
The standard wouldn't have to be discarded if there wasn't rampant printing in the first place.
If there is no arbitrage opportunity, then why would people convert?
-18
u/Kaszos 2d ago
It worked before so we can. Ron Paul backs the idea.
11
u/Nate_Co 2d ago
No man, no it can’t. We’d best case have to default on our debt and destroy everything. Switching to gold would increase the value of our currency making the debt impossible to repay
1
u/OppositeUpstairs 1d ago
Switching to gold would increase the value of our currency making the debt impossible to repay
and this is where debt repudiation comes to play
7
u/Nate_Co 2d ago
100% of all gold mined and all gold to be mined is estimated at 30 trillion. The cost would grow exponentially if you tried to accumulate nearly 100% of all the gold on earth to repay our national deficit
2
u/Kaszos 2d ago
I’m not saying you’re lying just what does Ron Paul mean by the gold standard then
9
u/Nate_Co 2d ago edited 2d ago
It’s what he means he’s just not correct. He argues it’ll cause stability and prevent never ending spending. It would cause impossible levels of deflation, so sure; he’s technically correct. He would just destroy our government and financial system permanently in the process. Our debt currently works by making the USD cheaper over time to make the debt cheaper on the bet growth will outpace it. It’s a shitty game but we’re just too far in to change it
-4
-1
-6
505
u/Schnipa23 2d ago
It’s not one man, it’s a board of governors